Inderjeet Singh vs State Of HP

Rakesh Kainthla, J

The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking interim bail in FIR No. 243 of 2023, dated 10.08.2023, registered at Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 302 and 382 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the police received information regarding the fight near Idgah on 10.08.2023 at about 6:00 PM. The police went to the spot and found two people lying in a pool of blood. They were taken to the hospital. One person was identified as Kunal Baba and was declared dead. The other person, Varun, succumbed to his injury after receiving first aid. The informant, Lovkesh Baba, made a statement that his nephew, Kunal, had received an Instagram call from Gaurav on 10.08.2023. Kunal disclosed that Gaurav had asked him to visit Banga (Punjab). The informant also talked to Gaurav, and the caller revealed that Kunal had been posting stories on his Instagram. The informant assured that Kunal would not do so in the future, and the call was disconnected. Kunal called the informant on the same day at about 4:30 PM and told him that Gaurav was coming to Nalagarh. The informant asked Kunal to stay at home. Subsequently, the informant received a call from his niece stating that Kunal and Varun were stabbed and were lying near Idgah. The police registered the FIR and investigated the matter. The police arrested the petitioner, and he is lodged in Model Central Jail, Kanda, District Shimla. The petitioner's father, Balbir Singh, has been diagnosed with a large cystic mass in the liver for which surgery is required. The petitioner needs an attendant to look after his father. The petitioner is the only son, and there is no other person to look after the petitioner's father. The petitioner's mother is an aged woman who remains ill. The police have filed the charge sheet, and the matter is pending before the Court. The petitioner would abide by the terms and conditions that the Court may impose. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on interim bail.

The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police received secret information on 10.08.2023 at about 6:00 p.m. regarding a fight near Idgah on Ramshehar Road. The police reached the spot and found two people lying in an injured condition. They were taken to the hospital. The Medical Officer declared Kunal dead, while Varun succumbed to his injuries during treatment. The informant, Lovkesh, made a statement to the police stating that Varun and Kunal were his nephews. Kunal had received a call from Gaurav. Kunal told the informant that Gaurav was asking him to visit Banga (Punjab). The informant spoke to Gaurav, who stated that Kunal had been uploading stories on Instagram. The informant assured Gaurav that Kunal would not upload any story in the future. The informant again received a call at about 4:30 p.m. from Kunal, who informed him that Gaurav was visiting Nalagarh. The informant advised Kunal to stay at home. At about 6:00 p.m., the informant received a call stating that Kunal and Varun had been stabbed and were lying near Idgah. The police registered the FIR and started the investigation. The Medical Officer stated that the cause of death of Varun was hemorrhagic shock and liver laceration due to antemortem injuries. The Medical Officer further stated that the cause of death of Kunal was spleen rupture and hemorrhagic shock as a result of antemortem injuries. The police found during the investigation that Gaurav, Inderjit Singh @ Indra, and one unknown person had used a motorcycle bearing registration number PB-08FB-9802 to commit the crime. The police obtained the call detail records and found that Gaurav was in touch with Inderjit Singh @ Inda, son of Surjit Singh. The police arrested Inderjit Singh, who revealed the involvement of Gaurav and Inderjit Singh (the present petitioner). The police searched for the other accused and seized the motorcycle bearing registration number PB-08FB-9802 at Amritsar. The police later arrested Gaurav Gill and the petitioner, Inderjit Singh. They disclosed the involvement of Akashdeep Singh. The motorcycle bearing registration number PB-08FB- 9802 was found to be registered in the name of the petitioner. The police also arrested Akashdeep Singh and recovered one iPhone from his possession, which belonged to Varun. Petitioner Inderjit Singh revealed that he had handed over the knife to Gaurav Gill. Gaurav Gill made a disclosure statement and got the knife recovered. Akashdeep produced a T-shirt, which was seized by the police. No case was found against Inderjit Singh, son of Surjit Singh, and he was discharged. The call detail records showed the presence of the petitioner and the other accused at Nalagarh on the date of the incident. The Medical Officer issued the final report stating that the injuries noticed by him could have been caused by means of a knife. Human blood was found on the knife, and the DNA on the knife completely matched the DNA of Varun. The face of Gaurav Gill in the photograph matched the face seen in the CCTV footage. The clothes also matched the clothes worn by the person seen in the CCTV footage. The CCTV footage was found to be continuous and without any editing. The police presented a charge sheet before the Court on 08.11.2023 and a supplementary charge sheet on 03.02.2025 and 26.04.2025. The statements of 18 witnesses, out of 51 cited by the prosecution, have been recorded. The matter is listed for recording the statements of prosecution witnesses on 10th, 11th, 14th, 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th September, 2026. Hence, the status report.

I have heard Ms Kanta Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State.

Ms Kanta Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner's father requires immediate surgery because of a large cystic mass in his liver. The petitioner is the only son, and there is no other person to look after his father. The petitioner's mother is aged, and she herself requires care. The matter is listed in September 2026, and the petitioner's presence is not required for the trial. The petitioner would surrender after the expiry of the interim bail and abide by the terms and conditions that the Court may impose. Hence, she prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on interim bail.

Mr Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State, submitted that the petitioner is involved in the commission of a heinous crime. He would intimidate the witnesses if released on bail. The petitioner can also abscond. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

I have given a considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully.

The photocopy of the prescription slip issued by PGI Premier Gastroenterology Institute, Jalandhar, shows that Mr Balbir Singh was treated with the complaint of Anorexia for one year. The medicines were prescribed to him, and he was advised surgery. Therefore, the plea taken by the petitioner that his father requires surgery is duly supported by the prescription slip placed on record. The petitioner has also placed on record the certificate issued by the Sarpanch mentioning that Ranjeet Kaur and Balbir Singh remain ill, and there is no one to look after them. This certificate corroborates the petitioner's version that the petitioner is the only person who can look after his aged father.

It was submitted that the petitioner can engage a paid attendant, and the petitioner should not be released on interim bail. This submission is only stated to be rejected. There is no evidence of the financial condition of the petitioner's family enabling them to engage a paid attendant. Secondly, being a son, the petitioner has a right to be present with his father during his difficult times. Therefore, the interim bail cannot be denied on the ground that the petitioner can engage the paid attendants.

The status report shows that the matter is listed before the learned Trial Court in September 2026. Therefore, the presence of the petitioner is not required for the trial and releasing a petitioner on interim bail will not affect the progress of the trial in any manner.

It was submitted that the petitioner is involved in the commission of a heinous offence and should not be released on bail. He will intimidate/influence the witnesses. These apprehensions can be removed by imposing conditions, and are not sufficient to deny interim bail to the petitioner.

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on interim bail for a period of 30 days subject to his furnishing personal and surety bond in the sum of ₹ I lakh to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court undertaking to attend the Court, if the matter is listed for hearing during the period of interim bail or seek an appropriate exemption, surrender on the expiry period of interim bail. While on bail, the petitioner shall abide by the following terms and conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall surrender before the Superintendent of Jail after the expiry of 30 days from the date of his release on interim bail;

(ii) The petitioner shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses or interfere with any evidence during the pendency of the interim bail.

(iii) The petitioner will furnish his mobile number and social media contact to the Police and the Court and will abide by the summons/notices received from the Police/Court through SMS/WhatsApp/Social Media Account. In case of any change in the mobile number or social media accounts, the same will be intimated to the Police/Court within five days from the date of the change.

The learned Trial Court is free to impose any other conditions as may be deemed fit by it.

The petition stands accordingly disposed of. A copy of this order be sent to the Jail Superintendent, Model Central Jail, Kanda, District Shimla, H.P. and the learned Trial Court by FASTER.

The observations made hereinabove are regarding the disposal of this petition and will have no bearing, whatsoever, on the merits of the case.